Forecast

Bridgeport waters down ethics reforms

Brian Lockhart| on August 12, 2014

BRIDGEPORT -- A year after promising a sweeping effort to weed out conflicts of interest, Mayor Bill Finch's administration is instead requiring something far less onerous of city workers and saving paperwork.

Finch, a Democrat, pledged last August to require department chiefs and other city employees involved in purchasing and procurement to fill out annual statements of financial interests modeled on those used by state government.

City employees would have divulged the same information required of state elected officials, state department heads and some other Connecticut employees -- business associates; sources of income over $1,000; securities, blind trusts, real property owned by the individual, spouse or dependent children; and creditors on debts over $10,000.

Instead, Bridgeport city workers will be trained to self-report any potential conflicts on a one-page form, then have the opportunity to explain in writing why those relationships are no big deal.

"We strongly believe this is the right approach for Bridgeport," said Finch spokesman Brett Broesder.

"It requires people to disclose what they perceive as a conflict instead of providing the public with the type of information and protections they deserve," Swan said. "I think it gives window-dressing a bad name."

He speculated there was push-back from employees who did not want personal information made public under the Freedom of Information Act.

Ricci had a key role in hiring Moutinho and paying him $400,000 to relocate a private driveway used by the contractor and some neighboring property owners so the city could move forward with a runway safety project.

Ricci was investigated by the city after Hearst Connecticut Media revealed his history of real estate transactions with Moutinho. The city determined Moutinho still held a mortgage on one of Ricci's properties.

At the time, Finch said Bridgeport, which has grappled with corruption, requires high standards of employee conduct, but not "an annual accounting of (their) outside financial interests ... which creates potential for conflict for those employees involved in the decision-making process for city contracts."

So the mayor said, "Department heads and those other employees involved in procurement will now be required to annually fill out a disclosure form, similar to that used by the state of Connecticut, in which the employee must disclose any financial or personal interests which may conflict with city contracts."

But a draft form only asks employees to volunteer potential conflicts, as defined by the ethics code, and to explain them in 13 lines. Employees can then make a case -- in 10 lines -- for why they are still "able to vote and otherwise participate fairly, objectively and in the public interest."

Broesder said after extensive research, the city decided this was the best approach.

"The conflict-of-interest form further promotes self-disclosure," Broesder said. He said it goes beyond "having a plethora of pages full of financial information that has no bearing on issues at hand" and instead "sheds light on relationship- or kinship-based conflicts."

Why not have employees volunteer potential conflicts of interest and require them to list financial details?

Broesder said it is "virtually impossible to review or discern actual conflicts" from financial disclosure forms because of the sheer volume and "the ambiguity involved with these forms, once filled out."

The new policy applies to members of the offices of the mayor, purchasing, finance, city attorney, labor relations, planning and economic development, policy and management, chief administrator, construction management and all other department supervisors and personnel involved in procurement.

Jeff Kohut, a Democrat who served on the city's Ethics Commission from 2005 to 2010, said the administration should use the state model and require employees also submit financial information.

"It might seem unwieldy," said Kohut. "But I think it will serve us better in the end."

Too many potential conflicts might "slip through the cracks" using the city's self-reporting form, he said.

City Attorney Mark Anastasi, in comments made last December, indicated the administration was grappling with how much financial information to mine.

"We're not concerned how much or how little Mark Anastasi might have in the bank," Anastasi said. "We're concerned that Mark Anastasi has a relationship with someone he's doing business with on behalf (of Bridgeport)."